Islam and the Big Bang

[ElPunto]

Garnaqsi;858243 wrote:

You have missed the point by miles and miles! Whether the Koran inspired Muslim scientists or not is altogether a different matter as to whether there is truth to these alleged scientific miracles. My point was that all these interpretations came after science, and hence are guilty of hindsight bias, and therefore one is justified in being skeptical about them. I'm not demanding for there to have been a complete and through explanation; it's just that there wasn't any in there at all, until these interpretations were devised after science. You have every right to be proud of whatever contributions Muslims have made to science, but there is nothing to be proud of giving Koranic verses a meaning that wasn't there for more than thousand years. It's just ridiculous and really morally abhorrent.

You can be skeptical about whatever you want. But I don't understand 'there is nothing to be proud of giving Koranic verses a meaning that wasn't there for more than thousand years. It's just ridiculous and really morally abhorrent.' No new interpretation or meaning has been given. The Koran describes in detail certain real world phenomenon that haven't been detailed scientifically until recently. That those descriptions closely 'match' the proven science - you can call hindsight bias or dismiss. But there is no after the fact manipulation of the Koran to match scientific facts. To make that allegation is ridiculous and morally abhorrent.

[Chimera]

Qarnaqsi, your point registered, but you fail to see mine. Ancient science was modern science until medieval science bloomed, medieval science was modern science until what is known in our era as 'early modern and modern science' replaced it, in two hundred years time what is known as 'modern science' will be classified under a different category, it's a human thing.

 

In the 7th century, Greek science was not thought in schools or universities, not even in modern Greece. Whatever the Byzantines had managed to gather was not enough to have a geographic influence that the previous Hellenistic civilizations had. The widespread view at the time was that the Earth was flat, a contemporary book transmitted by an illiterate man in the form of Prophet Muhammed(pbuh) however contained a verse referring to the earth as being the shape of an Ostrich egg. The likes of Ibn Rustu, Ibn Kordathyah, and other Abbassid scholars based their writing on that verse, and the digging up of old literate of the Greeks.

 

I failed to see why you would find it difficult to understand that Muslims would consider such a verse and book full of anthropological and scientifically confirmed hints to be a miracle from their creator? It doesn't matter that it would take centuries later for that verse to be actually confirmed scientifically by a scholar, the concept was still there.

 

The fact that ancient civilizations are mentioned, but whose physical presence had eroded beyond the simple gaze of man in the 7th century, does not mean a Muslim archaeologist of today can't feel pride in digging up through modern methods those same civilizations in the form of a modern discipline like 'archaeology', and consider their reference in the Quran as a 'miracle'.

 

Your stand on this matter is that Muslims cannot 'take pride' or 'reinterpret' those verses through the work of this archaeologist, because he is 'modern science' and their book is early medieval literature, that IMO is a silly stand.

[Garnaqsi]

ElPunto -- You say no new interpretation or meaning has been given. My point was that this happened, and I've explained how neither the expanding universe interpretation of that particular verse nor the ostrich egg interpretation of the other one was there until recently. I've even explained how Ibn Kathir gives these verses altogether different meaning than the one given by those who now champion the idea of scientific miracles. I'm happy to be proven wrong, but you did nothing to counter that; rather, you merely stated its negation.

 

Chimera -- The verse never carried that meaning at the time which those scientists lived. It had the interpretation that the earth was spread (for its inhabitants). Read any commentary of the Koran from that time and it will say that. The ostrich egg interpretation came only very recently, after the scientific world-view became dominant. So I don't see how you can say these scientists based their ideas on this verse.

 

It's not just that, but even today most translations of the Koran give the verse it's original unforced meaning:

 

Yusuf Ali: And the earth, moreover, hath He extended (to a wide expanse);

Noble Quran: And after that He spread the earth;

M.Pickthal: And after that He spread the earth,

Saheeh: And after that He spread the earth.

 

There are dozens of translations in here and almost all of them agree with the above! The Somali one says the same thing:

 

Somali Translation: Dhulkana markaas ka dib fidiyey.

 

 

[N.O.R.F]

Are there any Quranic Arabic experts here?

[Tallaabo]

*Blessed;857977 wrote:

Personally, I'm not a fan of HY, there are many scientific and Islamic fiqh errors in his books. His notions of creation being imagined is just odd and goes against the teaching of our deen. I advise Muslims to take the message in his writings / videos with a pinch of salt.

Actually I like his books although I disagree with him when he simply dismisses the theory of evolution on some questionable grounds. However, the idea of creation being just perceptions is not his own but is a centuries old Sufi philosophy. It is indeed a quite fascinating idea and is very difficult to disprove.

[Blessed]

^I agree with you on evolution. As far as his theories on creation and the way he positions Allah within creation are concerned, the refutation is within Quranic Ayat. I myself have started off by liking his works, but some of his ideas did not sit well with me and seemed to contradict teaching of the Quran, so I've researched them and would suggest that every Muslim does this. At the end of the day, we don't need science, art, etc. to proof that Allah exist, we do however need to make sure that our faith in Him is based on sound Knowledge and Haruun Yahya is not a scholar of Islam.

[Garnaqsi]

N.O.R.F;859370 wrote:

Are there any Quranic Arabic experts here?

Is that a cry for help?

[Blessed]

Here is a learned Islamic scholar however, who eloquently explains the futility of some of these science proofs/ negates the existence of Allah debates. “There is nothing in the logic of the created world that can irrefutably point to beyond its own nature…”

 

 

 

 

He goes into more detail in this long lecture, it's definitely worth listening to if you have the time.

 

 

 

[Blessed]

^The above post is intended to expand on my previous comments for someone who has objected to my last post in private. I'm not interested in debating my faith with people who don't believe because you're not interested in my Islamic perspective and I'm not interested in yours, so there is no point in going around in circles and disrespecting each other, is there?

[GaraadMon]

*Blessed;860991 wrote:

^The above post is intended to expand on my previous comments for someone who has objected to my last post in private. I'm not interested in debating

my faith

with people who don't believe because

you're not interested in my Islamic perspective and I'm not interested in yours

, so there is no point in going around in circles and disrespecting each other, is there?

Why would you assume that? What would be the point of a thread if there weren't any differing opinions?

 

Forum: A meeting or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged.

[Blessed]

Blackflash..

Errr. why would you assume that my lack of interest is based on an assumption? Yaab badanaa.. LOL.

 

 

Apophis, my personal take is up there, let me know which points you want expansion on.

[Blessed]

Spoiler alert:

 

You're going to hate yourself for wasting three hours.

 

 

I'm off, early start to a long day ahead.

[sharma-arke451]

i hate the feeble stand of this people. if you forsake an idea, for whatever reason your mind can bear, why on earth will your interest to debate be tied to it??

 

 

how does untrue, non existence issues centre the argumetn of one?

[GaraadMon]

Apophis;861043 wrote:

You would be taken more seriously if you didn't start with the highlighted words.

What did you expect? Hate is his trademark.

 

@sharma-arke451

 

I recommend the following regimen:

 

1.Stick your thumb up your rectum

2.Run in circles

3.While still following step 2, scream Death! And Murtad! A total of 15 times each.

 

Repeat this prescribed course for two weeks and if you haven't been rid of your bloodlust, seek professional help.

[N.O.R.F]

Garnaqsi;860500 wrote:

Is that a cry for help?

Just highlighting the futility of basing a whole argument on another's interpretation of a vast and complex language. Especially when the opposite can just as easily be drawn using the same sources (interpretations of the Quran and Ibn Kathir's tafsir).